We regret to inform you that your tax refund request was NOT processed successfully. This is beleived to have been caused by the submittion of incorrect/inacurate account information.

However, after the last account audition, the total refund payable to you is now 42,320.00 INR. Please follow the link below to re-submit a refund request and this time, endeavor to fill in your Information accurately to avoid further delay in the remittance of your tax refunds into your account

CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT A REFUND REQUEST(Hyperlink removed)

Note: Your request will be processed within a period of ten (10) working days

We appreciate taking the time to learn about our tax refund. It's one more way Income tax department can make your tax payment experience better.Tax Refund DepartmentDepartment 0f revenue,Ministry 0f finance,lndia

Now the mail is obviously a scam, but for a second I was almost taken in because of the email ID: refunds.net112@incometaxindiafiling.gov.in

That's almost official sounding. But if you go through the trouble of making this website or email ID, why don't the spammers also redirect me to a more official sounding link when I click on the 'CLICK HERE' link which instead led to a completely unofficial sounding http://socialbusinesslearning.dk/wp-content/plugins/wordsocial/inc/sc.funct.php?check=3&action=refund (Please don't click that)

Also, the 'Of' in the signature is spelt with 0 (zero) instead of O. And silly spelling mistakes. Oh, and also, there's no way I can qualify for that much refund, but I see the appeal. Its a nice, middle-of-the-ballpark figure for a mass mailer.

More than a third of divorce filings last year contained the word Facebook, according to a U.K. survey by Divorce Online, a legal services firm. And over 80% of U.S. divorce attorneys say they’ve seen a rise in the number of cases using social networking, according to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “I see Facebook issues breaking up marriages all the time,” says Gary Traystman, a divorce attorney in New London, Conn. Of the 15 cases he handles per year where computer history, texts and emails are admitted as evidence, 60% exclusively involve Facebook.

The book is a good read; unfortunately, I found the first half too confusing. The timeline would often jump 30-40 years forward and backward which made following the narrative a bit difficult. Reading becomes easier in the second half. Nevertheless, an interesting read, especially to understand about how the company was looked at (and operated) from a British point of view. Although it runs under 200 pages, its not a quick read, there's a lot of information packed within those pages.